The concept outdoor team building implies a set of consecutive learning experience activities that are mainly conducted in the outdoors with the aim of positively influencing the behaviour of the participant (McEvoy & Buller, 1997:209). According to Wagner et al. (1991:53) this form of team building mainly comprises of centre-based team building programs and wilderness-based team building programs. During CBTB the participants live and eat indoors while the participation in structured team building activities takes place outdoors. In contrast to this, the participants in wilderness-based team building live outdoors and take part in strenuous activities such as rock climbing, mountain climbing, orientation, camping, canoeing and sailing. In the corporate world there is currently a tendency to make use of CBTB to increase organizational effectiveness (Buller et al., 1991:58; Irvine & Wilson, 1994:25; Wagner & Campbell, 1994:4; DuFrene et al., 1999:24; lngram & Desombre, 1999:16; Salas et al., 1999:309-310; WiIliams et al., 2003:45). Notwithstanding the increasing popularity of these programs, there exists much scepticism concerning the real value of CBTB (Gall, 1987:58; Wagner & Roland, 1992:61; Wagner & Campbell, 1994:4). The aim of this study is to determine whether there is a difference between a wilderness expedition and a CBTB with regard to personal effectiveness and group effectiveness. According to Borrie and Roggenbuck (2001:3) the most innovative and comprehensive results of the dynamic nature of outdoor team building programs have been found in the wilderness or a type of wilderness environment, Ewert en McAvoy (2000:15) are of the opinion that the participation in activities in the wilderness can have a significant impact on the individual as well as the group. The test subject is identified by means of an availability sample and is randomly divided ahead of time into a control group as well as two separate experimental groups who participated in the CBTB (Venterskroon, Vredefort Dome) and the wilderness expedition (Central Drakensberg). This study is executed in the form of a quantitative pre-test post-test design (Thomas & Nelson, 2001:321-322). To measure personal effectiveness use is made of the Review of Personal Effectiveness and Locus of Control (ROPELOC) with a Cronbach Alpha-value of between 0,79 and 0,93 (Richards et al., 2002:1-4). The instrument focuses on psychological and behavioural aspects that are key components of personal effectiveness (Richards et al., 2002:1). The ROPELOC consist of 45 questions and is made up of seven main components of which three consist of various underlying subcomponents. The difference can be determined with regard to the main components as well as the underlying subcomponents. For the measuring of group effectiveness use was made of an improved version of Herselman’s (1998:149) group effectiveness questionnaire. It was aimed with this questionnaire to determine the effect of CBTB and the wilderness expedition on group effectiveness, as well as which advantages, if any, it has for the individual. This questionnaire consists of open and closed items on group aspects as well as individual aspects, to determine the participants’ attitude with regard to certain variables before and after exposure to the CBTB and the wilderness expedition. The results of this study showed that both experimental groups (CBTB and wilderness expedition) brought about successful change. With reference to personal effectiveness the paired t-tests showed that the CBTB lead to more change with regard to the main components as well as the subcomponents than the wilderness expedition. This change took place with regard to personal ability and beliefs, organizational skills, overall effectiveness, self-efficacy, time management and the coping with change. With regard to group effectiveness the wilderness expedition lead to more change than the CBTB with reference to group cohesion, leadership development, attitude change, success experience, self-concept, self-confidence and dealing with criticism. To determine whether there was a difference between a wilderness expedition and a CBTB with regard to personal effectiveness and group effectiveness, use was made of a covariance analysis. The results of these tests showed that with regard to personal effectiveness there was only one practically significant intergroup difference, namely stress management, and that with regard to group effectiveness two significant intergroup differences were found, namely creativity and group moral. In all of these cases the CBTB exhibited better. On the basis of these results the assumption that CBTB is more effective than a wilderness expedition, for the improvement of personal effectiveness and group effectiveness, cannot be made. It is recommended that CBTB be given preference if the outcomes of the program is personal effectiveness and wilderness expedition be used to improve group effectiveness. / Thesis (M.A. (Recreation Science))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2006

This thesis examines the hollow-earth theories of John Cleves Symmes and seeks to recognise and restore both his memory and his legacy. I outline Symmes’ theory that the Earth is hollow and habitable within, and accessible via holes at the North and South Poles, consider the impact of this theory on the commencement of the United States Antarctic Exploration program, and demonstrate its lasting legacy within the genre of Symmesian hollow-earth fiction. Previous scholarship has been intermittent, disparate and oddly contextualised, often assigning both Symmes and his theory to the world of the “weird and wonderful.” In order to study Symmes’ legacy, I synthesise previous scholarship and show the continuing presence of his theory – at times unrecognised and unacknowledged – in fiction. Commencing with a description of the series of publications in which Symmes publicised his idea, this thesis looks at his theory’s reception, with a discussion of several books and letters published in response to the theory – from contemporary times through to the current day. In determining the legacy of his theory, rather than the theory itself, I look at possible and probable sources for Symmes’ idea, and place it on the continuum of natural philosophy and science from the thirteenth century so as to set Symmes’ announcement in the perspective of its time. I then address Symmes’ influence on the United States Congress, which culminated in the United States Exploring Expedition of 1838-1842. Finally, I examine Symmes’ legacy in fiction, commencing with an extensive discussion of Symzonia, which some posit was authored by Symmes, and continuing through to the present. I find that while Symmes’ theory, and the ensuing debate about a hollow earth, may have advanced the speed with which the United States commenced Antarctic exploration, with time this exploration would probably have happened anyway. His greatest legacy is through the establishment of a body of hollow-earth fiction based around the fictional hole which now bears his name; “Symmes’ Hole” lives on in literature to the current day.

The thesis analyses the expedition (TAE) led by Dr.Vivian Fuchs and Sir Edmund Hillary from three vantage points: 1)the years from 1948 to 1955 leading up to the expedition 2) the interaction between the IGY and the TAE projects and 3) the role of the US Navy as the expedition unfolded. The thesis also investigates key events including the purchase of the ship Endeavour from Britain, the competition for leadership of the UK and NZ parties, the 'dash to the Pole' by Hillary, and the search for base sites and routes to the Polar Plateau. The thesis contains an overview historical introduction, a comprehensive literature review as well as a broad-based set of conclusions.

Xenophon of Athens probably did not write his Anabasis until thirty years or more after the events which it describes. This remarkable gap, taken together with the absence of a prologue, the presence of a number of prominent themes and authorial concerns, and the complex literary construction of the work, has made the task of explaining it problematic. Situating the text in the context of Xenophon's later life and wide-ranging literary output, in this dissertation I argue that apologia is the defining element in the work. Through his elaborate narrative structure and representation of his own character, Xenophon is defending himself, his social class, and his teacher, Socrates. In Books 5 and 7 (of 7) he is occupied with a rigorous defence of his conduct on the retreat, answering charges of deceiving the soldiers, hubris, corruption, and mercenary service, while in Books 3 through to 7, he is defending the memory of Socrates. For from the point of his introduction into the text at the opening of Book 3, following the decapitation of the Greek High Command at the Greater Zab River, Xenophon the character is acting as a pupil of Socrates would have done had he found himself in similarly dire circumstances. His actions, counsel, and moral bearing during the course of the retreat are a testimony to the value of his teacher's training, and powerfully undermine the charges of impiety and corrupting the youth levelled against Socrates in 399. At the same time, the outstanding leadership performance on the retreat of Xenophon's character reflects on himself as the historical figure behind the exemplar. By highlighting its different forms and bringing out its pervasiveness, the dissertation demonstrates that apologia is the major factor in the formation of the text.

The concept outdoor team building implies a set of consecutive learning experience activities that are mainly conducted in the outdoors with the aim of positively influencing the behaviour of the participant (McEvoy & Buller, 1997:209). According to Wagner et al. (1991:53) this form of team building mainly comprises of centre-based team building programs and wilderness-based team building programs. During CBTB the participants live and eat indoors while the participation in structured team building activities takes place outdoors. In contrast to this, the participants in wilderness-based team building live outdoors and take part in strenuous activities such as rock climbing, mountain climbing, orientation, camping, canoeing and sailing. In the corporate world there is currently a tendency to make use of CBTB to increase organizational effectiveness (Buller et al., 1991:58; Irvine & Wilson, 1994:25; Wagner & Campbell, 1994:4; DuFrene et al., 1999:24; lngram & Desombre, 1999:16; Salas et al., 1999:309-310; WiIliams et al., 2003:45). Notwithstanding the increasing popularity of these programs, there exists much scepticism concerning the real value of CBTB (Gall, 1987:58; Wagner & Roland, 1992:61; Wagner & Campbell, 1994:4). The aim of this study is to determine whether there is a difference between a wilderness expedition and a CBTB with regard to personal effectiveness and group effectiveness. According to Borrie and Roggenbuck (2001:3) the most innovative and comprehensive results of the dynamic nature of outdoor team building programs have been found in the wilderness or a type of wilderness environment, Ewert en McAvoy (2000:15) are of the opinion that the participation in activities in the wilderness can have a significant impact on the individual as well as the group. The test subject is identified by means of an availability sample and is randomly divided ahead of time into a control group as well as two separate experimental groups who participated in the CBTB (Venterskroon, Vredefort Dome) and the wilderness expedition (Central Drakensberg). This study is executed in the form of a quantitative pre-test post-test design (Thomas & Nelson, 2001:321-322). To measure personal effectiveness use is made of the Review of Personal Effectiveness and Locus of Control (ROPELOC) with a Cronbach Alpha-value of between 0,79 and 0,93 (Richards et al., 2002:1-4). The instrument focuses on psychological and behavioural aspects that are key components of personal effectiveness (Richards et al., 2002:1). The ROPELOC consist of 45 questions and is made up of seven main components of which three consist of various underlying subcomponents. The difference can be determined with regard to the main components as well as the underlying subcomponents. For the measuring of group effectiveness use was made of an improved version of Herselman’s (1998:149) group effectiveness questionnaire. It was aimed with this questionnaire to determine the effect of CBTB and the wilderness expedition on group effectiveness, as well as which advantages, if any, it has for the individual. This questionnaire consists of open and closed items on group aspects as well as individual aspects, to determine the participants’ attitude with regard to certain variables before and after exposure to the CBTB and the wilderness expedition. The results of this study showed that both experimental groups (CBTB and wilderness expedition) brought about successful change. With reference to personal effectiveness the paired t-tests showed that the CBTB lead to more change with regard to the main components as well as the subcomponents than the wilderness expedition. This change took place with regard to personal ability and beliefs, organizational skills, overall effectiveness, self-efficacy, time management and the coping with change. With regard to group effectiveness the wilderness expedition lead to more change than the CBTB with reference to group cohesion, leadership development, attitude change, success experience, self-concept, self-confidence and dealing with criticism. To determine whether there was a difference between a wilderness expedition and a CBTB with regard to personal effectiveness and group effectiveness, use was made of a covariance analysis. The results of these tests showed that with regard to personal effectiveness there was only one practically significant intergroup difference, namely stress management, and that with regard to group effectiveness two significant intergroup differences were found, namely creativity and group moral. In all of these cases the CBTB exhibited better. On the basis of these results the assumption that CBTB is more effective than a wilderness expedition, for the improvement of personal effectiveness and group effectiveness, cannot be made. It is recommended that CBTB be given preference if the outcomes of the program is personal effectiveness and wilderness expedition be used to improve group effectiveness. / Thesis (M.A. (Recreation Science))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2006

Typescript. / Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hawaii. 1967. / Bibliography: leaves 211-218. / xi, 218 l illus., maps, tables

Zugl.: Saarbrücken, Univ., Diss., 2003

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Michigan, 1968. / Includes abstract. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 262-279).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Florida State University, 2005. / Advisor: Dr. Peter P. Garretson, Florida State University, College of Arts and Sciences, Dept. of History. Title and description from dissertation home page (viewed June 13, 2005). Document formatted into pages; contains v, 150 pages. Includes bibliographical references.

H.F. Graff's Thesis--Columbia University. / "Reprinted from the Bulletin of the New York Public Library of 1950-1951." Includes bibliographical references.